Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

this is my first post.

I have a 2005 6MT CV35 in Lakeshore Slate.

I've been playing with the idea of an AWD conversion from a G35X...and wondered if the CV35 is capable of being converted to AWD easily?

Also, if it's possible to upgrade to the twin intakes like on the new 350Z...

forget it. bury it deep and never look back. the cost probably not worth justifying it.

depending how the front transaxle is located, in addition to new gearbox you may need a new floorpan to make some room for the front transaxle. i've seen the same route with r33 where the floorpan is just different between r33 gtr & gtst despite chasis is the same.

AWD is only available on sedans with VQ25DD engine, so even if you get the floorpan, if your car is currently a coupe, don't expect to be able to swap it easily. Also if you get to find the transmission, I am not sure if it will bolt onto your VQ35DE engine if you got a coupe there.

you'd be better off sell your car, and buy a proper AWD sedan version of the V35/G35 if you can find/import one. Remember you will end up with a less-sexy look of a sedan, and only 210HP-ish (155-ish kw) engine from the VQ25DD instead of 280HP (210kw+) of VQ35DE - and power to weight ratio of VQ25DD may not be enough to make the car eligible for low volume SEVS import - good luck.

not sure about the twin intakes, probably again, not worth it unless you can get a new intake plenum which i would imagine cost an arm and leg. the single intake was good enough, heck i had 230rwkw with factory airbox and panel air filter in my r33 gtst - that's estimated 270kw @ flywheel. no pings!

for sure the factory intake is sufficient for 210-220kw @ flywheel for an NA engine!

on a quick note - if you're prepare to spend heaps of $$ to do the conversion anyway, probably import yourself a front half cut of a Stagea 250RX/RS with VQ25DD engine & AWD transmission - and see if the trans will bolt onto your VQ35DE. sell of the VQ25DD afterwards to lessen the $ pain.

there is a website with 350Z awd photos on the net, but keep in mind the car belongs to and was done by a professional big garage, like JUN or something, so cost for them is irrelevant compare to most common mortals like us.

intake wise on an NA engine, most intake modifications including headers etc, probably only gonna yield a few extra kws, not really worth the money spent, unless a forced induction is introduced, e.g. a $7k-$10k HKS S/C kit or turbo kit, or a $17k APS 500HP twin-turbo kit. Believe me, I have been quoted that much. I would rather keep the car standard and nicely driveable in traffic.

The USDM G35 came in a 3.5L AWD version - Sedan only though. Also the M35 Stagea came in AWD with the turbo 2.5L (VQ25DET) and the 3.5L NA (later models). So a couple of options for donor engines/drivetrains there.

However I think that the Coupe drive train is different to the Sedan so this could still be a very difficult conversion.

Here's the AWD 350Z (by Jun):

http://jpcnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/4wd-35...s-of-speed.html

Very much a mish-mash of bits from different cars, not just a simple matter of grabbing an existing drivetrain.

Top Secret did a V35 "GTR" at one point using a Coupe - I can't find a decent article on it but AFAIK it uses a VK45 4.5L V8, not sure of where they got the drivetrain from. But again heavily customised.

intake wise on an NA engine, most intake modifications including headers etc, probably only gonna yield a few extra kws, not really worth the money spent

Not compared to modifying a factory FI setup, but the gains are there. A catback will see you around 15-25rwkW. Picking up a used 350Z intake tube from someone whose gone FI will see some gains for not very much money.

I wouldn't replace the headers (maybe the cats too, I'm not sure) without management, since it tends to really throw the mixtures out on a stock ECU.

I would rather keep the car standard and nicely driveable in traffic.

Simple bolt-ons are still nicely drivable in traffic. Its only if you start going to crazy light flywheels or big cams that you might see issues. But if you do breathing mods the car doesn't become any less drivable through the midrange than stock.

And the twin turbo cars are very streetable. They have better fuel economy than the NA cars if you drive them sensibly, you get to make even fewer gearchanges, and if you don't plan on thrashing the car for long periods you can do a mild clutch upgrade and not worry too much about upgrading the cooling infrastructure.

  • 3 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
    • Yes they do. For some maybe. But for those used the most by abusers, ie Skylines, the numbers are known. The stock eyebrow height for R32/3 Skylines is about 365/375mm or thereabouts. The minimum such heights are recorded in adjacent columns in the database.
×
×
  • Create New...